Friday, June 5, 2015

“Under legal rules of evidence, not all unsigned documents or papers fail the test of admissibility. There are kinds of evidence known as exceptions to the hearsay rule which need not be invariably signed by the author if it is clear that it issues from him because of necessity and under circumstances that safeguard the trustworthiness of the paper. A number of evidence of this sort are called entries in the course of business, which are transactions made by persons in the regular course of their duty or business. We agree with the labor arbiter that the drug test result constitutes entries made in the ordinary or regular course of duty of a responsible officer of the vessel. The tests administered to the crew were routine measures of the vessel conducted to enforce its stated policy, and it was a matter of course for medical reports to be issued and released by the medical officer. The ship’s physician at Curacao under whom the tests were conducted was admittedly Dr. Heath. It was under his name and with his handwritten comments that the report on the respondent came out, and there is no basis to suspect that these results were issued other than in the ordinary course of his duty. As the labor arbiter points out, the drug test report is evidence in itself and does not require additional supporting evidence except if it appears that the drug test was conducted not in accordance with drug testing procedures. Nothing of the sort, he says, has even been suggested in this particular case.”

x x x

“In the present case, Jose, Jr. did not show that the Court of Appeals’ ruling is violative of any law or jurisprudence. Section 43, Rule 130, of the Rules of Court states:

SEC. 43. Entries in the course of business. — Entries made at, or near the time of the transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to know the facts therein stated, may be received as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.

In Canque v. Court of Appeals, the Court laid down the requisites for admission in evidence of entries in the course of business:

(1) the person who made the entry is dead, outside the country, or unable to testify;

(2) the entries were made at or near the time of the transactions to which they refer;

(3) the person who made the entry was in a position to know the facts stated in the entries;

(4) the entries were made in a professional capacity or in the performance of a duty; and

(5) the entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.

Here, all the requisites are present: (1) Dr. Heath is outside the country; (2) the entries were made near the time the random drug test was conducted; (3) Dr. Heath was in a position to know the facts made in the entries; (4) Dr. Heath made the entries in his professional capacity and in the performance of his duty; and (5) the entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.”